The Effects of the Cold War on the Middle East Essay

The Effects of the Cold War on the Middle East - Essay Example The condition for the communism’ triumph was to bring the whole world under communist rule, whereas the West’s target was to thwart the threat of communism. Eventually with the dissolution of the former Soviet Union, the West had been able to destroy the main drive of expansionist communism. After the fall of the Soviet Union, the remnants of communism were no more threat to the capitalist world. Thus the US-led west proved itself to be the true claimant of communism. Yet the United States’ success to eliminate the threat of communism through the dissolution of the Soviet Union perpetuates the debate on whether the United States as a superpower can, decidedly, declare its authority unchallenged. From a different perspective the Cold War can be viewed as the superpowers’ conflicts of interests. In plain eye, on the Soviet Union’s part, the war was a fight of idealism and on the United States’ part, it was a moral defense against expansionist c ommunism. But beneath both these moralist and idealist apparels lies the superpowers’ contest for a superior position in international politics. Through the Soviet Union’s dissolution in 1989, the threat from the communist front simply changed its platform from the communist block to the Islamic block and the Cold War turns into â€Å"War on Terror†. Indeed the threat from the extremist Islamists was one of the direct derivatives of the Cold War. Since even after the Cold War, the United States had to face additional Islamic threat, once watered by the Reagan Administration, one can deem that the US did not really win the War; rather the communist just lost it. A Brief Overview of the Cold War The Cold War can be defined as the conflicts of interests between the two superpowers, the United States of America and the Soviet Union, in the post Second World War period. It existed from 1947 to 1991. After the Second World War, the US President Franklin D. Roosevelt d id not need the Soviet support any more to win over Japan after testing the atomic bomb, ensuing the 50 years long Cold War. Thus, the Yalta Conference in the Crimea, Soviet Union, in February 1945 between the â€Å"Big Three† allies of the Second World War was one such event that structured the start of the Cold War (â€Å"The Cold War† 1). Though during the Cold War, ideological, political, economic and military tensions existed at an extreme level, the superpowers did not become involved in any direct war. Rather their military involvements were confined to proxy wars in various geographical regions of interests. Nuclear arm race between the two main parties of the war, the USA and the Soviet Union, began as a response to the superpowers’ desire to overpower each other. During the period, the world experienced a worldwide regrouping of the countries into the US block and the Soviet block. This regrouping in the Soviet block was mainly based on the Marxist pol itical ideology of Communism, whereas capitalism and democratic interests dominated the countries in the US block. This regroupings in both of the blocks often turned into expansionism and counter-expansionism. (Schweizer, 1994, pp. 69-74) Reagan’s Policy to Win the Cold War Reagan’s policy towards the Soviet Union can significantly be marked as a dual approach in the sense that on one hand Reagan’s administration chose to provide both overt and covert support to anti-communist communities and guerrilla movements in order to â€Å"roll back† â€Å"Soviet-backed communist governments in Africa, Asia, and Latin America† (D'Souza, 2003) and on the other hand, it put effort on growing an intimate, but cautious, relationship

The effect of modern culture on managerial behavior in Egypt Research Proposal

The effect of modern culture on managerial behavior in Egypt - Research Proposal Example Though this is a general definition, we can see some important aspects that translate to organizational behavior (Deal and Kennedy, 1982). Behavior in any culture of an organization, a nation, or a family is educated to its members so that the patterns of behavior, thought, speech, action, etc. are developed and restricted to what the overall society considers as acceptable. In specific, the proposal will discuss some of the aspects related to abovementioned terms in context of modern Egyptian culture (Reidy, 2010) that will be part of the major research. Literature Review The study of Egyptian culture and its impact in terms of knowledge, values, and manners that are shared by the Egyptian society (Bari, 2004) on managerial behavior and functions is very vital to define the positive and negative impact that it has on an organization and how it can contribute to the success or failure of the organization itself. The Egyptian organizations are centralized and hierarchical in structure and culture, also known as a ‘hydraulic’ society.

An Insight into Academic Writing Essay Example for Free

An Insight into Academic Writing Essay Authors Gerald Graff and Cathy Berkenstein claim in their book, They Say, I Say, that academic writing is not about â€Å"playing it safe and piling up truths and bits of knowledge,† like many people assume. Rather, it is about the dynamic interaction between other people’s points of view and the author’s response to those perspectives. In chapter one of Graff and Berkenstein’s book they emphasize the necessity of balance when implementing certain writing â€Å"moves,† specifically, when introducing a counter-view, summarizing other’s arguments, and when quoting someone else’s words. Graff and Berkenstein contend that by opening an argument with an explanation of what the thesis is responding tointroducing a counter-viewgives the main point clarity and relevance. They encourage stating the opposing view or assumption initially so that it will define and explain what the thesis is addressing. But, they also caution the writer not to bloat their introduction with extraneous information for fear of losing the audience’s focus and engagement. What Graff and Berkenstein suggest, then, is that â€Å"as soon as possible you state your own position and the one it’s responding to together, and that you think of the two as a unit. † Basically, they insist that the best way to give a â€Å"genuine response to other’s views† during academic writing is to have a balance between introducing what â€Å"They Say† (the opposing point of view) and what â€Å"I Say† (the writer’s response). If being in a constant dialogue with others’ positions is essential to arguing persuasively, as Graff and Berkenstein claim, â€Å"then summarizing others’ arguments is central to [the writer’s] arsenal of basic moves. † All too often during a summary, writers will provide their own opinions on an article’s topic rather than revealing what the article is actually stating. On the opposite extreme, there are the writers who â€Å"do nothing but summarize,† which dilutes their own views in an ocean of someone else’s ideas. Graff and Berkenstein remind us that a â€Å"good summary requires balancing what the original author is saying with the writer’s own focus. † In other words, an exceptional summary contains the perspective of the original author, while emphasizing the points the responding author wants to address. One of the best ways to initiate an effective argument is not only to summarize what they say, but to quote their exact words. According to Graff and Berkenstein, â€Å"Quoting someone else’s words gives a tremendous amount of credibility to your summary and helps ensure that it is fair and accurate. † By quoting someone else’s exact statement it serves as a proof of evidence that you are not just fabricating another’s claim, but that you are disclosing their true ideas. Like introducing a counter-view and summarizing, quoting requires that you find an ideal balance between the quantity of quotes and content of commentary. A common issue with quoting is when the author assumes the quote speaks for itself. As Graff and Berkenstein, quotes are like literary orphans that have been taken from their original context, â€Å"they need to be integrated into their new textual surroundings. † In simpler terms, a quote needs to be introduced, interpreted, and then connected to the central idea. I found chapter one of Graff and Berkenstein’s book, â€Å"They Say,† to be extremely interesting and useful. The way they tied all their information to a central idea, while explaining how to do just that fascinated me. I felt like their writing had a constant flow from introduction of a move, to implementing balance, to common problems, how to fix those problems, and then to exercises that would reinforce their primary concepts. Their style and content kept me engaged and focused. Also, I learned a handful of writing tactics, like introducing a counter-view, summarizing, and inserting quotes, that I was not one-hundred percent sure on how to do prior to the reading. Overall, I found the chapter to be engaging, informative, and beneficial to me and my writing style.

More Than Just A Shirt :: essays research papers

Before reading this poem one doesn't completely realize the details and stories behind an object as basic as a shirt. I had no idea that so much detail could be found in such a simple object, much less an entire poem. This poem presents a very good example of how we can easily overlook terrible things which happen, but choose to ignore. Even though we know bad working conditions exist in small countries which produce products we need, we choose to buy these products and support the inhumane working conditions. The poem does a good job of making us more aware of the world around us, and that there are more to things then meets the eye.The poem Shirt by Robert Pinsky is written in a free verse form. The poem tells the story behind a shirt. It starts by describing the shirt and its physical characteristics, but then goes into the story of the workers which produce it. The shirt is not one particular shirt, but all shirts in general. The first story which is described in the poem tells us about a factory which has poor working conditions. These conditions led to a fire which kills one hundred and forty-six people. A specific example of a man who tosses three girls out the window and then plunges to his own death serves to show us the horror of the situation. the poem then continues on to tell us of in humane conditions in Scotland. It ends by telling us about the slaves who picked and planted the cotton. The speaker seems to be telling us a story in order to inform us of what's going on in the shirt industry.Robert Pinsky doesn't have many obvious examples of diction in his work, although hints of it can be found. There is a simile in the first line of the tenth stanza. The line goes "corners of both pockets, like a strict rhyme"(line 28). When reading the poem many images present themselves. One of the first images I see continues to present its self through out the poem. This image is one of the shirt with its " invisible stitches along the collar "(2), " twin bar-tacked corners "(27), and " Buttons of simulated stone ".(45) The strongest image in the poem which really stuck with me was one of the man dropping girls out of the window, and then jumping himself.

“Death of a Salesman” by Miller and “A Doll’s House” by Ibsen Essay

â€Å"Death of a Salesman† and â€Å"A Doll’s House† are two plays that were written in different centuries. In these plays, among other things, is presented the place that women hold in the family, as well as in the society. Although in many aspects, the two protagonists of the plays, Linda and Nora respectively, appear to have things in common, at the same time they are very different, since Nora seems to be more modern and liberal than Linda, which is ironic given the fact that Ibsen wrote his play seventy years earlier than Miller. The representation of the two women in these two plays is what will be discussed in this paper. In â€Å"Death of a Salesman†, Linda embodies the role of the traditional American woman, which was to take care of her husband, her children and the house, regardless of her personal aspirations, and dreams. The woman is expected to stay at home and engage in everyday house works, like cooking, cleaning and sewing, while the man, as the head of the family, is expected to find a well-respected job position because it was the man’s duty to provide for the entire family. So Linda has given up on everything she hoped for in her life, she sacrificed herself, just to be with her husband and her two sons, even though her husband doesn’t seem to be treating her very well. Willy disregards every word Linda attempts to interject in family conversations by interrupting her and accusing her of interrupting him. He shouts at her, he doesn’t let her speak and when she does, he speaks to her badly. A distinct example is the passage towards the end of Act I, in which Linda attempts in vain to speak her mind: Linda: â€Å"Maybe things are beginning to-† Willy: â€Å"Stop interrupting!† (1907), and later on when Linda tries again to say something Willie tells her abruptly â€Å"Will you let me talk?† (1907), while he is the one doing most of the talking all this time. Despite her husband’s constant degradation, Linda appears to be a woman who is very loyal, loving, caring and understanding to her husband. Not even once did she complain about Willy’s belittling behavior. Linda seems to be for Willy the perfect wife: she always speaks very nicely to him, she makes sure that his clothes are always mended, and that he has got everything he needs with him before he leaves for a trip. She loves him very much and she doesn’t seem to hold against him the terrible way that he treats her. A distinct example is the fact that right after the incident of insulting her, she proposes to sing to him a lullaby, so that he could relax : Linda: â€Å"Just rest. Should I sing to you?† Willy: â€Å"Yeah. Sing to me† (1909). At the same time, Linda stands up for him, takes his side, even if it means to get into a fight with her sons, for not treating him with the respect he deserves as their father: Linda: â€Å"He’s the dearest man in the world to me, and I won’t have anyone making him feel unwanted and low and blue †¦Either he’s your father and you pay him that respect, or else you’re not to come here† (1902). Also, and she tries to protect him by asking for their sons’ help, when she realized that he had been trying to commit suicide, since she didn’t want to do anything that would let Willy know that she has understood that he wanted to die. She was very concerned not to hurt her husband’s pride, realizing that if she confronted him, Willy would be devastated: â€Å"How can I mention it to him? Every day I go down and take away that little rubber pipe. But, when he comes home, I put it back where it was. How can I insult him that way?† (1904). Linda is also a very dedicated mother to her children, that she managed to raise in the best way possible, when she was all alone with them, while her husband was away for a long period of time. She has always been with them; she has educated them since the day they were born and she has tried to install in them good values. Even now, that her sons are adults, she still reprimands them about being selfish, impolite, rude and disrespectful towards their father. And her sons seem to love her and think very highly of her; for them she’s the perfect role model for a future wife: Happy: â€Å"Somebody with character, with resistance! Like Mom, y’know?† (1885) This is ironic, since her own husband doesn’t seem to appreciate her, and treats her  badly. On the other hand, Nora, the protagonist of â€Å"A Doll’s House†, represents the society’s notion for the women in the late 1800s, which is not very different from that of the mid 1900s, in the sense that the wife has to stay at home, taking care of her husband and children, and doing all the household chores. Under no circumstance is a woman expected to work and contribute to the family income for the man, for once more, the man is the one that works and brings in the money. Thus, poor Nora is financially dependent, in a great extent, on Trovald, and every time she wants to buy something she has to ask him to give her some money: Nora: â€Å"Your could always give me money, Torvald. Only what you think you could spare. And then I could buy myself something with it later on.† (1768). Nora, like all the women of her era, is controlled by her husband, who is the one that wants to make all the decisions for her, even what she would or wouldn’t eat, like when he forbidden her to eat the macaroons that she liked so much. Nora, just like Linda, is very concerned with her husband’s health, but instead of just watching she decides to do what she can to save his life, even if this means acting behind his back and hurting his pride, in order to get the necessary amount of money to save his life. Nora: â€Å"Torvald is a man with †¦ pride – it would be terribly embarrassing and humiliating for him if he thought he owed anything to me† (1775) because for a man that was considered to be strong enough, it would be regarded as an insult to admit that he needs the help of a helpless woman. What Nora did shows that although she appears to be a typical woman of her era, in reality she’s very different, she is a rebel that risks everything so that she won’t lose the man that she loves. In the end, when everything is revealed, she’s very hurt, for she realized that the man that she risked everything for never loved her, and that all she was to him was a beautiful toy-d oll to play with, and not a person with real feelings. The way that the men in her life have treated her is expressed in one word through the metaphor that Ibsen uses: a doll. That has been very confusing to Nora and her role as a mother of three children, since it has made her  also think her children as dolls. The only thing that Nora does with her children is to play games. She has completely trusted their upbringing to the nursemaid without worrying about them or trying to teach them values and how to behave, like Linda did. In the end, she realizes that she would have never become a good mother to her children, and in fear of hurting them or turning them into dolls she decides to leave them forever: â€Å"And never see the children again either. Never, never.† (1813). In the end, Nora realizes that she had been living a lie, and she is faced with the dilemma of engaging the responsibilities to her husband and children or the responsibilities to herself. But the need to break free from the simple, decorative roles that she has been assigned, and to find herself, is greater than anything else. She can’t be of any use to anyone without discovering her self first, and see what she can do on her own: â€Å"If I’m ever to reach any understanding of myself and the things around me, I must learn to stand alone† (1818). She’s young and beautiful, contrary to Linda who stayed until the end with her husband and children, and she has the whole life ahead of her to love and to be loved, make a new family, since she finally made the decision to leave Trovald and never come back, unless â€Å"a miracle of miracles† (1821) would happen. Both plays discuss the position of the women in the family and in the society. Two different women, from two different times were victims of their era. The one is old, unattractive but caring and supportive; she is Linda, the woman of the 1940s. The other is young, and beautiful but also more modern and demanding; she is Nora, the woman of the 1870s. Both of them weren’t happy with their lives, but only one of them, Nora, finds the strength to leave and change her life. And that is why the Linda was the victim of the capitalistic society, while Nora’s more of a feminist.

A Mans Humility in the Grapes of Wrath by John Steinkbeck

A Man’s Humility In The Grapes of Wrath The Dust Bowl was a time in the 1930’s were malpractice cultivation, made cultivated farmland turn to dust then winds blew dust to make a huge dust storm that happened all over the U.S and Canadian prairies, it forced many to families to leave their homes and find jobs elsewhere. John Steinbeck is known for his skillfulness when it comes to detailing a situation or surrounding, he is the author of The Grapes of Wrath. In this excerpt from The Grapes of Wrath a man needs to feed his family with only ten cents to buy a loaf of bread, tries to persuade Mae; a waitress in a diner. Humility in this excerpt is shown as something a honorable and responsible person has. The man’s humility affects Mae’s behavior by keeping her away from being too defensive and being rude towards the man. In the beginning of the excerpt the man stands outside of the diner standing with curios humility. When Steinbeck uses â€Å"curious humility† curious means strange in this phrase , which means it was humility that is rare to see which makes it strange. In the first part of the excerpt the man comes up to the diner and asks if he can buy a loaf of bread for ten cents. â€Å"The man took off his dark, stained hat and stood with a curious humility in front of the screen. â€Å"Could you see your way to sell us a loaf of bread, ma’am?† Mae said, â€Å"This ain’t a grocery store. We got bread to make san’widges.† â€Å"I know, ma’am.† His humility was insistent. â€Å"We need bread and

Essay about Egalitarian in Australian Society

Introduction: This paper analyzes and explains how the social class play influences social inequality in Australia, as well as how the myth of egalitarianism was created and how it is maintained. It also shows how inequality has influenced transformations in political, familial and industrial relations and how it has to be taken into account when endeavoring to come to grip with all kinds of inequalities. Due to changes in the societies, the is need to recollect the ideas of different classes, ethnical backgrounds, gender inequalities, political class, and embed them in the self, body and politics. There is a long history here that I could point to but I just want to draw out some of the more important forces operating to create the particular understandings of Australian egalitarianism. If we are going to talk about how egalitarianism became so firmly rooted in the Australian ethos we have to go back to the 19th century. According to McCarthy, the idea that Australia was relatively classless or that class did not matter very much stems back to colonial days. In its beginnings white Australia lacked the rigid class system taking shape in Great Britain. Australia did not have the traditional aristocracy of Great Britain – that group who gained their social position at the top of the tree through birth, title and rank. There were very few genuine gentlemen – people who did not need to work but were independently wealthy through inheritance. A wealthy land-owning class quickly developed but they fell below those traditional elite of Britain. Initially Australiaâ€⠄¢s class structure centered on a fairly basic division between landowners and their workers and across the 19th century it developed into a more complex system as the economy itself became more complex. So how did the idea come about that class didn’t matter very much? There were some desires to escape a rigid class structure. Firstly the argument is advanced that while there were social classes the barriers between them were fluid – there was fairly free mingling between social groups (especially in comparison to Britain) and there was also fluidity in terms of climbing the ladder that is that people, through hard work, could move from the working class to the middle and perhaps from the lower middle to the more solidly middle class. And nor in colonial Australia were the ranks of gentlemen firmly closed. This idea took hold pretty early in Australia because of instances of emancipists, former convicts, achieving comfortable lifestyles. The ex-convict who made good helped to foster the idea that people in Australia were judged on their merit rather than birth or past deeds. As a new society, with everything needing to be built from scratch, there was a lot of opportunity in Australia to ‘do well’. Australian workers were in a good position because there was a shortage of labor. Another important argument is that on the frontier people simply had to join together, regardless of class. You might remember from the early reading of Russel Ward’s description of the ‘typical’ Australian – he wrote of a fiercely independent person who hates officiousness and authority and displayed a cynical attitude to the pretensions of the wealthy and to anyone who liked to think of themselves as superior. Ward traces the development of this egalitarianism of manners to the convicts – convicts he argues developed a strong sense of community and solidarity; and a disdain for their masters. This was carried into the ‘lower orders’ more generally. Free immigrants he claims adopted the outlook of the old hands. Ward also thought that life on the frontier was important in the development of an egalitarian, collectivist ethos. People worked together – rich and poor. Success required hard work there was no real place for gentlemanl y pretensions –all needed to roll up their sleeves. And because bush life was so difficult with the population being spread over such large tracts of land for people to survive they needed to rely on one another. So class structures and more importantly class attitudes broke down. The discovery of gold in the 1850s did a lot to enhance this image of Australia. It was partly because on the goldfields former wage-earners might have been able to throw off the yoke of service and work for themselves rather than for a boss – small groups worked co-operatively without a master – bred a sense of independence – Some diggers did strike it lucky – new-found wealth enabled workers to acquire property, a house and perhaps establish a business – employees became employers. Wealth came through luck not breeding education or talent. This is a very brief historical background that goes some way to explaining the development of a strong commitment in Australia to egalitarianism. (McCarthy, 2008) According to Poleg, Egalitarianism in Australia is a dangerous indication of contemporary disparity since it reveals and makes people conscious on the way favors and resources are inequitably distributed against the expectations of the people on what they perceive as their rights. These feelings or experiences of unfairness are indelible in Australians especially as they grow through their stages of childhood socialization to adulthood. Controversies surrounding this unfairness patent themselves more explicitly at the political class as well as social life. Nevertheless, my core element is to analyze the persistent structures as well as the transformation of social inequalities since I realize that a new approach is essential. Painstaking researches have grouped these links into three categories of inequality being; Empirical reality, or the proof of its existence, Theory, or its sociological approaches and finally the individuals experience extent Egalitarianism originated during the time of the white settlements through the English prisoners who were the outcasts of the English system. Also, the struggle against the British soldiers and later, the early Australians developed types of brotherhood and mate ship among the pioneer Australians. Egalitarianism in Australia was reinforced by foreign visitors but not fully invented. At the beginning of the 20th century, Lawrence D.H visited Australia and gave some remarks through writing that Australia was a great relief in the entire atmosphere where then he cited that everybody should free in Australia. Lawrence was impressed that there was no class distinction in the entire Australian society where nobody felt special or than another. According to how Lawrence’s confession, some of the Australians were better than others but they could not show. In the 19th century, an English author called Marcus Clark wrote exclaiming that the new Australians were not nation of snobs like the English and that they were not of extravagant boosters like the Americans but a simple nation of drunkards. In addition to that, Australia is also considered to be among the pioneers of women social rights. According to the (Female suffrage act, SA) It was the second country in the world to recognize women as voters constitutionally. After the formation of the Brotherhood, inequality was highly enhanced. Australians became sexists as well as egalitarian mate-ship among males actively excluded female even though they were reluctantly accepted formally in 1885 as equal. Poverty is also another factor th at has highly affected egalitarianism since it was discovered to be among the threats to social life in Australia in the late 1960s. (Poleg, 2004) Greig, suggests that egalitarian in Australian nation or in other words classless society as he calls it, pervaded the colonial awareness at around 19th century whereby Australia emerged as a fresh economy during that period. Urbanization rate was growing tremendously at a very alarming rate leading to complex divisions of labor and then giving birth to a modern state called Australia. At that time, it became integral therefore finding a place in the global capitalist economy via the growing and exporting of crucial products where this was made easier through the mercantile ports which as well served as manufactured imports destination. Even though modern manufacturers remained embryonic at work, especially men, they were sufficient and led to the development of urban class alongside a class of pastoral capitalists and local mercantile. Toward the end of nineteenth century, egalitarianism was fully captured in Australia whereby it was simply referred to as the Workingman’s par adise; the term initially used by Henry Kingsley a novelist. Due to the fact that urban workers had recently migrated, their current status by then could not be compared to those they had left behind and this led to the reinforcement of the myth of egalitarianism in Australia. As a repercussion, the myth of workman’s paradise was misused by capitalists and statesmen since they triggered migration from the British Isles toward the workman’s paradise.   As a result, travel memoirs both local and international journals began to began to praise the kind of lifestyle that Australian working class had. They also started congratulating Australian government of for taking good care of their working class. Daily articles like the Melbourne that there was no country in the whole world which the comfort of the working class was so guaranteed and secure as Australia. It was later concluded that the working class permeated the Australian culture in terms of attitude. This led Australia to be considered as social reforms laboratory.   (Gre ig, 2003) As observed by Gregory Smith, egalitarianism has been transformed into a study which investigates qualities in Australian literature since it is among the characteristics that which celebrates the Australian national identity and character as well. The Australian identity was counterfeited in the wretchedness of pioneer era, put under a litmus paper the ‘first and the second world wars’ followed by the drastic challenges of immigration after war. Australian identity is carefree, democratic and egalitarian as Smith extols it. Due to the egalitarianism, the consciousness of Australian religion features respect among them empirically sensitive real and suspicious of theories. The mainstream culture of Australia is characterized by a firm past pioneering individualism. Australia is multi-cultural, full of skepticism and indifferent toward religion (Smith, 2001) Conclusion: Since the mid 1990s the idea of there being two Australia’s has developed – an educated, cosmopolitan and affluent urban Australia and a culturally marginalized rural or outer suburban Australia on the other. Some among the elites embraced the culturally diverse and more cosmopolitan Australia; others welcomed the more open economy. But for many ordinary Australians both the new economy and the new diverse society threatened what they saw as the Australia old. And because many did not prosper with globalization it has been easy to displace their anxieties about economic insecurity onto new immigrants and Aborigines. What we have also seen is an argument that suggests that minorities /Aborigines are privileged (getting more than a fair go) and the needs of old Anglo-Celtic Australians have been ignored. One of the more invidious developments in Australia from the mid 1990s More recently this acceptance of diversity has come under threat. And what is so fascinating is th at many in wanting to cling to a particular sort of egalitarianism have attacked minority groups as being the recipients of special privileges. Indigenous Australians, so this line of argument goes, get too many handouts. Such was the argument of new political as well as social forces that emerged in Australia in 1996. References: Poleg, D. (2004): A Short Overview of Australian Egalitarianism. OUA. Greig, A. (2003) Inequality in Australia. UTF. Smith, G. (2001): The Australian religious verse. OUP. Peeters, B. (2006): Egalitarianism in Australian discourse. UAE. Mc McCarthy, T. (2008): The myth of Egalitarianism. PCM.